Laserfiche WebLink
�_9 For reference, the proposed vacant developable lot includes the existing vacant land area <br />north of County Road C, south of the existing surface parl�ing lot and that which lies <br />between the frontage road and Pascal Street. <br />�. I t] In review of the proposed PRELIMINARY PLAT the City Engineer indicates a need for a <br />10 foot wide utility and drainage easement adjacent to the west, south and east property <br />lines. <br />REVIEW of EASEMENT VACATION: <br />�#. �� In 2003 the City of Roseville negotiated with JLT Roseville Corporate Center LLC for a <br />10 foot wide pedestrian pathway easement over a portion of the northeast comer of their <br />parcel (subject easement is noted on the preliminary plat). The pedestrian path and pond <br />improvement were associated with the Arona redevelopment by United Properties — <br />which brought pedestrianacces�lconn�ctians to the surroundingneighborhood. <br />�, ! 2 The need to vacate the pedestrian pathway easement is being mandated by the Ramsey <br />County Surveyor and must occur prior to the recording of the MSP Addition plat. <br />Because this is a unique situation (one that would be difficult to resolve andlor support in <br />a different fashion) the Community Development and Public Wor�CS/�rzgineering staff <br />support the VACATION of the pedestrian path easement and its rededication after the <br />MSP Addition plat is recorded. <br />S,� STAFF COMMENTS/FINDIIOTGS: <br />�.] Staff has reviewed the information submitted by HTPO Engineers, Surveyors and <br />Landscape Architects pertaining to the preliminary plat (lot alignment and size) and found <br />that the proposed lot size meets the minimum standards identified in Section 1005.15 of <br />the Roseville City Code. <br />�_� Park dedicationrequirementsfor this land divisionwill be reviewedl�y the Park & <br />Recreation Commission and a recommendation forwarded to the City Council. <br />�_.3 The City Planner has reviewed the land division proposal and found it to be consistent <br />with the 2006 awroval. The City nlanner recommends that additional land be dedicated <br />for County Road C; that all nec�:ssary/a��iicable utility and drainage easements be <br />vrovided and noted on the olat: and that the aedestrian easement be rededicated after the <br />MSP Addition plat is filed for recording. <br />�_� STAFF RECOMMENDATION: <br />�r, E Based on the information provided and the findings in Section 5 of this project report, the <br />City Planner recommends approval of the PEDESRTRIAN PATHWAY EASEMENT <br />VACATION and two-lot PRELIMINARY PLAT by MSP Commercial, subject to the <br />following conditions: <br />PF07-014_RCA�0326�7.dnc Page 3 of 4 <br />